I don't think in the final analysis of ones work the viewer gives a shit if the image was shot with a Fluorite,aspheric lens, or a bottle bottom, they care more about if your pictures "say" anything to them, the worship of equipment for it's own sake is futile, photography is about pictures.

I don't think in the final analysis of ones work the viewer gives a shit if the image was shot with a Fluorite,aspheric lens, or a bottle bottom, they care more about if your pictures "say" anything to them, the worship of equipment for it's own sake is futile, photography is about pictures.

You care if the lens allows you to take a picture you couldn't take otherwise. If not, everybody would be happy with pinhole cameras.

You care if the lens allows you to take a picture you couldn't take otherwise. If not, everybody would be happy with pinhole cameras.

Jim B.

The reason that people want huge aperture lenses is more about acquisition and their image (in the mistaken belief that bigger is better) than if they need them for practical low light photography, it's overkill like buying a Ferrari to do your shopping at the local supermarket.
I've been using Canon FD lenses for 35years and never needed a bigger standard lens than my 50mm f1.4 which aperture for aperture the best of them. Gear freaks, and obsessive lens testers rarely in my almost fifty years experience as a photographer rarely take worthwhile pictures with their equipment because their raison d'être is acquisition and testing of gear not creating pictures, when I consider claims that people I meet are photographers I don't ask them about their equipment only to see their work, because anyone with money can buy cameras and lenses.

Last edited by benjiboy; 03-19-2013 at 11:13 AM. Click to view previous post history.